Jump to content

emp weapon


jack3top
 Share

Recommended Posts

New project called emp project

new missile called emp missile 

cost: 14MAPS

Last for 12 turns, can only launch one EMP once every 24turns, meaning nation will be free from emp for at least 1 day.

 

effect: if EMP is launched, nations have to resort to using ground forces for the next 12 turns. Only affects the war that the emp is launched in..

 

Eg nation a has wars with nation b and c, nation b launches emp at nation a in their war. EMP only affects war between nation a and nation b. not nation a and nation c war.

 

update: add emp project

emp can only be used 4 turns after purchasing it,

upon emp strike, one city will lose power and all the things it provides, say barracks etc will be cut for 24turns

 

credits: p&w community

Edited by jack3top

discussion before violence

What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

game can maybe be altered to max at 14 instead, forgot about about the max map of 12, thks for reminder.

discussion before violence

What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To OP imo. This game does need some change up though.

suggest ways to nerf it. 

discussion before violence

What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean a unit that could cut power to improvements can be devastating.

I agree with you, but in rl there such a weapon, why not here?besides game is boring. and this will fundamentally change the game, the max amounts of map being raised to 14 will alter the game. Opponent will  have to decide whether or not they should launch emp missiles or nukes. We can have a emp project that decreases the emp success by say 20%. 

 

Maybe we can also put it that you can only launch emp missiles 4 turns after you have purchased it. This means that your opponent has 4 turns to spy your emp missile.

Edited by jack3top

discussion before violence

What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh, personally this looks like it's OP and in one way we already have this with nukes having the capabilities to take out power plants (yeah it's up to chance but still the chance is there and it's safe to assume you won't be getting that power plant back until the war is over). There's also the issue of how long. I mean if it's too long that's definitely OP and if it's too short what's the point of spending a lot on it (safe to assume this will be an expensive weapon). Also I'm also gonna assume this will be protected under Sheepy's rule that you can't spy it away on the day it's built, so it still gives you time build up the MAPs to launch it.

 

On a side note I'm okay with MAP cap increasing.

  • Upvote 1

Nerd To The Core

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh, personally this looks like it's OP and in one way we already have this with nukes having the capabilities to take out power plants (yeah it's up to chance but still the chance is there and it's safe to assume you won't be getting that power plant back until the war is over). There's also the issue of how long. I mean if it's too long that's definitely OP and if it's too short what's the point of spending a lot on it (safe to assume this will be an expensive weapon). Also I'm also gonna assume this will be protected under Sheepy's rule that you can't spy it away on the day it's built, so it still gives you time build up the MAPs to launch it.

 

On a side note I'm okay with MAP cap increasing.

 

^ What she said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh, personally this looks like it's OP and in one way we already have this with nukes having the capabilities to take out power plants (yeah it's up to chance but still the chance is there and it's safe to assume you won't be getting that power plant back until the war is over). There's also the issue of how long. I mean if it's too long that's definitely OP and if it's too short what's the point of spending a lot on it (safe to assume this will be an expensive weapon). Also I'm also gonna assume this will be protected under Sheepy's rule that you can't spy it away on the day it's built, so it still gives you time build up the MAPs to launch it.

 

On a side note I'm okay with MAP cap increasing.

you should be able to spy it away when its built. However you need to purchase the emp 4 turns earlirer before launching it. The point here is that your cities will still be powered until the 3rd emp strike. The EMPS in this case only limits both sides to use soldiers for a limited number of turns. After 3 consecutive emp strikes, both nations will lose power for a short amount of time, say 12 turns. After that power is restored automatically. The main focus of this emp missile is that it fores both sides to use soldiers for a limited number of turns.

 

or we can remove the losing power after 3 consecutive emp strikes.

Edited by jack3top

discussion before violence

What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you should be able to spy it away when its built. However you need to purchase the emp 4 turns earlirer before launching it. The point here is that your cities will still be powered until the 3rd emp strike. The EMPS in this case only limits both sides to use soldiers for a limited number of turns. After 3 consecutive emp strikes, both nations will lose power for a short amount of time, say 12 turns. After that power is restored automatically. The main focus of this emp missile is that it fores both sides to use soldiers for a limited number of turns.

 

or we can remove the losing power after 3 consecutive emp strikes.

If it's until the third strike then again what's the point of buying them. If the point is force both sides to only use soilders well think about it by then one side will probably already have their conventional army taken out by the time the third emp hits and by then most likely in a loosing war and with the war probably being close to over (think about it even if you chose not to fortify or do anything else it'll take more than twenty-four hours to get the MAPs you need for each strike) they'll think it best to just to wait it out until the war expires. The one who does fire it who's loosing wil again most likely not have the soilders to make a counter attack. And again this will assumably be an expensive weapon so stockpiling a weapon that might not be all that useful and can be spied away more quickly than nukes might not seem all that desirable.

 

Basically if you want this to be a mechanic that spices up the game it would have to knock out power on the first hit (someone suggest it only knocking it out for one city which is a good place to start) and basically finding a balanced time limit where its worth it but not OP.

Nerd To The Core

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why would anyone want to ever use this thing? 

 

You have to save up for a day (ill just ignore the 14 map thing) to launch a weapon that for 1 day forces your opponent to only run ground attacks on you?  and even better its only against you and does not affect any other wars he is fighting?  Is this suppose to be the anti tS weapon?

 

you say its a way to force people to choose between nukes and this thing?  why would I ever choose to force someone to attack me on ground rather than do 1500-2000 infra damage to them?  This is a loser weapon, but whats worse, is by the time you can most likely use it, its going to be too late for you to turn your war around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why would anyone want to ever use this thing? 

 

You have to save up for a day (ill just ignore the 14 map thing) to launch a weapon that for 1 day forces your opponent to only run ground attacks on you?  and even better its only against you and does not affect any other wars he is fighting?  Is this suppose to be the anti tS weapon?

 

you say its a way to force people to choose between nukes and this thing?  why would I ever choose to force someone to attack me on ground rather than do 1500-2000 infra damage to them?  This is a loser weapon, but whats worse, is by the time you can most likely use it, its going to be too late for you to turn your war around.

not a anti-t$ weapon lol, no such weapon exists. What do you suggest?I love to see this added, but im not god, cant get everything correct, hence I posted it here so everyone can discuss.

discussion before violence

What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm gonna have to disagree and go with Sweeeeet Ronny D on this one. 14 MAPs is a ton. You could do 3 naval battles/air strikes. 4 ground battles, a missile or even a nuke. And then have room to almost squeeze in another ground battle.

 

Or

 

Restrict someone to only ground attacks. While some people don't log in a ton, and 14 MAPs could be made between 2 login periods. The war could be turned around completely in the time someone saves up for this.

 

You could be blockaded, lose air and maybe even ground control in the time it'd take to restrict someone from doing those things.

well, I didnt consider this point tbh, but to me, being able to turn around the war would be gd. 

discussion before violence

What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue is the way you have it, this weapon is only useful for a specific scenario in a conflict, that honestly probably doesn't happen that often.

 

I think someone above already mentioned this, have it cut the power in a city for 24 turns and have it cost 6-8 MAPs,  Then say you are fighting with 3 guys you can coordinate EMPing an opponent, and take a 15 city guy and effectively turn him temporarily into a 9-12 guy, and that could actually make a strategic difference in a war.  Without the power, he loses resource production, he wont be able to use any troops in that city, and i also believe he cant buy back troops for that city.

 

Its gotta last for longer than a day, or it isn't effective enough as a weapon, I could be convinced to go 3 days but that seems a little long, and it cant cost a ton of MAPs because then it takes too long to launch and again is ineffective as a weapon, this is the kind of weapon you use at the start of a war, which is why I would make it only 6-8 MAPs, so you can launch it pretty much first thing when defending or attacking, and it will allow you to stack them, which is really when they become effective.

Edited by Sweeeeet Ronny D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue is the way you have it, this weapon is only useful for a specific scenario in a conflict, that honestly probably doesn't happen that often.

 

I think someone above already mentioned this, have it cut the power in a city for 24 turns and have it cost 6-8 MAPs,  Then say you are fighting with 3 guys you can coordinate EMPing an opponent, and take a 15 city guy and effectively turn him temporarily into a 9-12 guy, and that could actually make a strategic difference in a war.  Without the power, he loses resource production, he wont be able to use any troops in that city, and i also believe he cant buy back troops for that city.

 

Its gotta last for longer than a day, or it isn't effective enough as a weapon, I could be convinced to go 3 days but that seems a little long, and it cant cost a ton of MAPs because then it takes too long to launch and again is ineffective as a weapon, this is the kind of weapon you use at the start of a war, which is why I would make it only 6-8 MAPs, so you can launch it pretty much first thing when defending or attacking, and it will allow you to stack them, which is really when they become effective.

Well, as per the comments here and above, ok as per what you said, the emp power outage will last for 24turns then (2 days). MAP wise I think that 6-8MAP is a little low. Cutting power to improvements for that particular war is actually very powerful in my opinion. maybe 10MAPs would be better, we want to prevent abuse. Also, once the emp hits, a city will lose power. Maybe the city with the highest infra?

Edited by jack3top

discussion before violence

What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it would be like a nuke, where you can pick which city to hit, it would be less useful if it was random, and it will allow you to target cities with more military improvements, or whatever improvements you may want to shut off.

 

But like I said before, the real power of the EMP that I suggested is found in coordinated EMP attacks or stacked EMP attacks.  Which is why you can't have it cost a ton of MAPs to use.

 

I have 25 cities, which generally gives me a pretty decent advantage on whoever I am fighting, but if you can shut off 5-6 of my cities, I can find myself in a bad spot real quick.  The question tho, is it better to try to shut my cities down or just run coordinated attacks to wear my forces down.  The goal of a new weapon should be to make that a legitimate question you have to ask yourself when fighting.

 

Also cutting power to 1 city is not very powerful.  You make the EMP on lvl with the cost of nukes, and then the cities that will find it most effective will be the ones that cant afford to, or severely handicap their growth to buy it.

 

The biggest area of possible abuse, is say a war like the one we have now, you have guys with 8-10 cities hitting guys with 15-18 cities, those larger city nations that can afford to buy an EMP, can really devastate a low city count nation.

 

Or you want to talk about turning a war around, you are fighting 5 offensive wars, and you have locked down all 5 of them.  If they all have EMPs they can each launch 2 emp attacks, and shut down 10 of your cities in 1 day, and you have just gone from easy wins, to OH !@#$! and those 5 dudes can bust out a double buy and swing that war right around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While shutting off a city's power for 2 days sounds very powerful, I still don't feel it's a very worthwhile war option. I like the idea, adding more to war would be fun, but when people realize the stats of what can be done in the time it takes to use it, I doubt it'd be much more than ships before the war update, an expensive, almost completely unused war mechanic.

 

Because, well let's say your attacker loves his ships, and will only use ship attacks, he has 100 more ships than you, and you save up 10 MAPs because you feel the EMP attack will help cut off some ships. While you do this you loss 28 resistance, that's 1/4 of an entire war. For the cost of shutting down one city.

 

At a lower level where people might have like below 10 cities, and everyone has a similar military. Yeah, it'd probably be worth it there. Taking away 10% of a nation's total military at that size would likely secure the win. But higher and higher up the nation's, the lower and lower the worth.

 

Say you're fighting Ace with his 30 cities, you use the EMP on him, you've hardly taken 3% of his military

Emps will force both sides to fight with soldiers for 12turns, aside from cutting off power to ones city.

 

it would be like a nuke, where you can pick which city to hit, it would be less useful if it was random, and it will allow you to target cities with more military improvements, or whatever improvements you may want to shut off.

 

But like I said before, the real power of the EMP that I suggested is found in coordinated EMP attacks or stacked EMP attacks.  Which is why you can't have it cost a ton of MAPs to use.

 

I have 25 cities, which generally gives me a pretty decent advantage on whoever I am fighting, but if you can shut off 5-6 of my cities, I can find myself in a bad spot real quick.  The question tho, is it better to try to shut my cities down or just run coordinated attacks to wear my forces down.  The goal of a new weapon should be to make that a legitimate question you have to ask yourself when fighting.

 

Also cutting power to 1 city is not very powerful.  You make the EMP on lvl with the cost of nukes, and then the cities that will find it most effective will be the ones that cant afford to, or severely handicap their growth to buy it.

 

The biggest area of possible abuse, is say a war like the one we have now, you have guys with 8-10 cities hitting guys with 15-18 cities, those larger city nations that can afford to buy an EMP, can really devastate a low city count nation.

 

Or you want to talk about turning a war around, you are fighting 5 offensive wars, and you have locked down all 5 of them.  If they all have EMPs they can each launch 2 emp attacks, and shut down 10 of your cities in 1 day, and you have just gone from easy wins, to OH !@#$! and those 5 dudes can bust out a double buy and swing that war right around.

You are right, choosing which city to target your emp at sounds gd. You mentioned about the abuse part, so, maybe we can put the foolowing restrictions:

 

a nation can only launch one emp weapon per turn

a nation can only eat 2 emp weapons a day

 

if the city count disparity is more than 4, the one with the emp will only cut city power for 1 turn. This will hopefully discourage people from using emps to target small nations. If the small nation has a project that blocks emp, the odds of blocking emp will increase by 10%.

discussion before violence

What I post do not represent the views of the alliance unless otherwise stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.